LCD screens - You get what you pay for!

Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs Forum' started by matt_p, Nov 2, 2005.

Tags:
  1. matt_p

    matt_p
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    851
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +38
    I've seen a fair few threads around of people who have been disappointed with their LCD purchases, and lots of people are currently on the look-out for screens to go with their xbox 360s, sky HD etc. I think people should be aware that with LCD screens, you really do get what you pay for.

    In my opinion, LCD tvs as recent as a couple of years ago were borderline unfit for use as a TV. Ghosting, smearing all over the screen... Absolutely awful! I was looking for flat screen TV to go in my new flat in 2003, but the quality was so poor that I bought a mid-range Toshiba CRT as a stop gap until things got better and prices came down.

    For me, LCD only became acceptable (quality and price-wise) with this years models, and I plumped for the Hitachi 7200. And very fine it is too! Likewise, the latest screens from other top manufacturers all seem to be of a similar quality and are finally looking good value for money.

    What worries me is that with the increased interest in LCD, lots more people are coming in 'blind' and are looking for bargains, when such a thing doesn't really exist yet. The "acceptable-for-TV" panels and electronics are still in the hands of only the top manufacturers; the supermarket no-names and other smaller companies are still using old stock which is pretty grotty at best.

    I have seen plenty of LCDs, from top Philips to Sainsbury's specials and lots in between, and :eek: :eek: :eek: MY GOD! The difference is phenomenal! It makes me feel bad to see people spend plenty of money on screens that are absolutely hideous to look at, when if they spent an extra £100 or £200 or so they could have got a pretty decent Samsung or Toshiba etc.

    I won't even go into the whole HD compatibility thing, I'll be here all day. Just have a look at the Tevion thread to see what can go wrong with supermarket specials.

    My advice if you're on the look out for a screen is: stick to the latest screens from the major manufacturers. There is no such thing as a LCD bargain, as the decent technology hasn't filtered down to the small manufacturers/rebranders yet. Spending £600 on a 32" Asda LCD is a false economy, because you won't be getting half the screen you'd get if you spent £850 on a 'top-name'!

    Rant over.
     
  2. coley65

    coley65
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    152
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +4
    Great post Matt very informative I have had 2 32" LCds Tevion and now the Humax. I took a look at some other sets yesterday and had a play. I have to say I still think Lcds have a long way to go none are perfect. I was inpressed by the panansonic because the screen was nice and bright. I saw the LG model running a Hi def demo which also impressed me.

    Now the Tevion was a great set the problems here with are really all minor but the main 2 parts of the set the panel and the audio were outstanding and second to none. What let it down was the awful pc resolution side of things. But running a 1080I movie through vga was breath taking.

    The humax I have now is weird the picture looks dull and dark and slightly ot of focus and the hd side of things just looks like a good picture not stunning. But the PC side of things is superb in all resolutiuons text is crisp and clear it is perfect. The set is meant to have a 1000:1 contrast ratio but I really doubt it.
     
  3. Geoff_W

    Geoff_W
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    235
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +25
    I agree Matt, but when you see the atrocious picture quality that Joe Public seems to accept as 'normal', it's hardly surprising there's a market for cheap, poor quality tat.

    For me, picture and sound quality is paramount, with price a secondary consideration. Which is why at the moment, I'm not prepared to buy into any new TV yet - the technology is still far too fluid, and HD is just another unknown quantity.

    Geoff
     
  4. screemer

    screemer
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,484
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Southport
    Ratings:
    +53
    Exactly Geoff, I can never believe the amount of people that will aimlessly walk into say Comet or Currys and just buy the one they like the shape of or colour?? Then when i say to people they just comment " its just a tv"???WTF
     
  5. bignige

    bignige
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    718
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +32
    Sort of true post, if slightly obvious.
    Although I still maintain, the picture quality from Sky looks so much better on my 26" Asda Dual than it does on my 32" Samsung from Waratah.
     
  6. chowells

    chowells
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think it would be a fairer comparison if they were both the same size. The 26" screen will inevitably make the grotty bits smaller and less noticeable.
     
  7. J.Glen

    J.Glen
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Great post.You should see the situation here in Greece where people are even more ignorant.The LCD craze has finally catch up with us and stores are offering every ancient model for "low" price(like 1000-1200 euros) and people are deceived from the LCDs' slick looks.

    The only positive news is that some decent models(like the Samsung R51) have become cheaper and give a person that doesn't want to spend over 1300-1400 euros a good option but it seems that some times ignorance prevails.
     
  8. Mad Mikeyboy

    Mad Mikeyboy
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    356
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Renfrew
    Ratings:
    +12
    I paid £270 for a 20" dual for my bedroom and think the PQ is superb.There is a market for budget LCD's, for people like me that have a big expensive set in the lounge and just want something small and slick for the bedroom without breaking the bank.
     
  9. David Mackenzie

    David Mackenzie
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,351
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    Yup, I'd say you're totally right. It baffles me that people will spend just under 1000 pounds and know they're getting something that isn't nearly the best - my opinion has always been, if you're going to spend that much money, save a little longer and go all the way.
     
  10. clonmult

    clonmult
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    You're all being somewhat eliteist - not everyone *needs* perfection, or can justify spending such money (please, this isn't intended as flamebait - I used to be heavily into high end audio, I've just had a reality check).

    We bought the Crown 32", mainly as it just fits our bill - it has the visual impact required, looks okay, we don't spend hours watching movies every day. To be honest, most of the time its left on CBeebies. I'll watch the odd movie on it, and the picture off DVD is easily adequate.

    Even though its not the best screen out there, it easily highlights bad picture on some sources - on the ITV4 launch, it showed how bad the picture was on the Chelsea game, but the ITV1 coverage of the Liverpool match on freeview was fine. In fact, the ITV4 picture was so bad (and in 4:3), that I couldn't bear watching it.
     
  11. bignige

    bignige
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    718
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +32
    I don't think that's the case, Sky+Samsung via RGB gives a faint stripey effect to the whole picture. If I turn RGB off via the Sky box the picture isn't stripey.
    With the Dual and the same conditions, the picture is a lot better.
     
  12. matt_p

    matt_p
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    851
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +38
    You start by saying that we're being elitist, then end by saying that you couldn't bear to watch your TV!

    The point I was making was that by spending relatively little extra you can get a dramatic improvement in the quality of the product you are buying, which can sometimes be the difference between unwatchable and acceptable.
     
  13. David Mackenzie

    David Mackenzie
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,351
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    Yup, you're totally right - I do always forget that a lot of people buy LCD TVs because of the convenience (that is, the space saved) - whereas for me that's just a benefit. I just love the look of a really high quality LCD TV.
     
  14. clonmult

    clonmult
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Nope, read what I said - even the "lowly" crown TV was highlighting that the source picture that ITV4 was transmitting was pretty bad. Also, I was wound up by the fact that one of the ITV4 headline launch programs wasn't in widescreen (I know, they were dictated by the foreign broadcast, but its still irritating).

    If we'd gone for the Samsung 32" or Sharp 32" sets, we would have had exactly the same problem - the source was pretty choppy.

    To you, the extra £300 may well be "relatively little", but to me it isn't.
     
  15. MikeKay1976

    MikeKay1976
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    Messages:
    8,691
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    do any sets - either lcd or plasma have a descaler type processor built into them to clean the image up?

    would seem like a liogical step for a top of the line screen
     
  16. bashtage

    bashtage
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Many do, although lots lead to the 'pea soup' effect (the grass in a football stadium looking like pea soup) which I presume is a simple form of local pixel averaging to remove noise. In the end, you can't substitute for missing signal (or data).
     
  17. jxvaug

    jxvaug
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    what about dell tv,s how good are they
     
  18. daveblade

    daveblade
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    366
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +15
    been thinking of getting a plasma for months now but i have seen a good deal on a samsung le40r51bx and a home pc deal that looks tempting im just trying to find out how good the tv is before i buy this set up any help would be great thanks for reading everyone
    dave :lease:
     
  19. Tholzel

    Tholzel
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    In my opinion (having seen all of next year's plasmas, LCDs and LCOS, etc., products, here is the net-net:
    1. Plasma is currently the best fully flat big screen for sports. But it will struggle to become true high definition, i.e., 1028 pixels wide.
    2. LCOS rear projectors--the slim ones (about 18-inches deep) give excellent picture quality. They are fast (no motion blur), saturated and have the least chicken wire effect because some 90% or more of their pixels are filled--(Unlike plasma).
    3. LCDs have the highest real-life (lighted room) contrast ratio--which is important to give a crisp, sharp looking image. But they all suffer from motion blur until next year when the Philips "Aptura" backlight comes out. I would wait until then.
    4. The "Next Big Thing" will be multiprimary color rendition in which 4 to 6 primary colors are used (instead of the 3: Red, Green & Blue, RGB. This expands the CIE diagram, affording more and deeper colors. The effect can be quite amazing asnd very satisfying. Accurate skin-color rendtion has been somewhat of a problem, but this will surely be ameliorated if not fixed entirely.
     
  20. diggler46

    diggler46
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,050
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +46
    as with everything in life peoples priorities differ....

    I've known lots of frineds over the years never bother buying a proper scart lead for consoles, simpy because it doesn't really matter to them....where as to me I have to have one...

    Same goes for TV's and picture quality. Lots of people are not bothered about getting the best, they just want a tv to watch tv on. They aint bothered bout gettign the best quality.....
     

Share This Page

Loading...